Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Organisation of Bible articles


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was Speedy keep and mark as failed policy proposal.  Jerry  talk ¤ count/logs 21:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Organisation of Bible articles
This page appears to circumvent WikiProject Bible as the established forum for discussion of Bible articles. It co-opts a general name that might be of use to WikiProject Bible to present a single proposal on one aspect of organization. Finally, it is essentially an edit dispute, not a policy, guideline, or process, and hence belongs in article talk pages or on a WikiProject, not in Wikipedia space. Shirahadasha (talk) 02:07, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep, it's a proposed policy, deal with the proposal on equal terms, rather than using MfD to shut down discussion, please. &lt;eleland/talkedits&gt; 02:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment:Using policy space to address an individual edit dispute would quickly mire policy space in a sea of detail, even if the proposer hadn't tried in the established forums for this type of discussion(WikiProject Bible and AfD on individual articles) and failed to prevail. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 02:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete as POV fork.  Equazcion •✗/C • 02:30, 11 Mar 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Several commentators at the failed Afd for these articles proposed creating a notability guideline. The proposal, although not labeled or described as such, may have been intended to be that notability guideline and if so could perhaps be re-labeled and reformulated in the form of a notability guideline, something like Notability (Bible articles). I recognize a notability guideline for Bible articles would be a legitimate proposed guideline, particularly if it could be described in general terms rather than directed at a single, specific dispute. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 03:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep at least until until someone can demonstrate what it would be a POV fork of. Mangoe (talk) 03:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ...of WikiProject Bible.  Equazcion •✗/C • 04:00, 11 Mar 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think so. The project doesn't own these articles; it's up to the project to find the discussion and visit it, wherever it may be happening. Also, I don't see a discussion in the project for it to be a fork of. Mangoe (talk) 10:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry I didn't get a word of that. Which project doesn't own what articles? It's up to which project to find what discussion? You don't see what discussion in what project? To clarify my statement, I'm saying the project we're discussing here, Organisation of Bible articles, is a POV fork of WikiProject Bible. Wikipedia only has one project per topic -- not multiple projects to address a single topic from different viewpoints.  Equazcion •✗/C • 11:07, 11 Mar 2008 (UTC)
 * You still haven't shown me where the people in the Bible Wikiproject discuss this issue. At least in the projects to which I belong, it is felt that the members must go to where the discussion is. Mangoe (talk) 14:35, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - but probably rename as per the above. It actually was discussed some time ago on the Bible project's talk page, although admittedly few people were involved in the discussion, and then discussed again when another editor proposed creation of individual articles on each chapter of the Bible. I tend to agree that it appears to be more of a notability guideline than anything else, and wouldn't object to seeing it renamed to indicate that. I do acknowledge how the creator of the page might have had some difficulty figuring exactly what the proposal would technically qualify as, however. John Carter (talk) 14:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.